On 4/2/2013 3:59 PM, usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Our sharp Moose writes:
>
>>> 2. Potentially more significant is that deconvolution sharpening has become
>>> available since this app was created. Note the dates of the laudatory
>>> quotes on the web page, all quite a few years old.
>>> Simple comparisons have led me to switch from USM based sharpening tools to
>>> deconvolution based tools for all my 'capture' sharpening and virtually all
>>> post
>>> downsampling re-sharpening.
> I was waiting for a comment like this. The PKS manual says capture
> sharpening is more gentle and usually tweaked to largely affect
> midtones. The PKS can be used in lieu of capture sharpening in ACR by
> changing the default 25% to zero. So Moose turns sharpening in ACR
> off too to use FM deconvolution in PS later?
Yes. As far as I can recall, I've had ACR sharpening turned off for many years.
I generally use NeatImage first, often
even at base ISO, then FM.
My NI profiles usually have some re-sharpening applied, so that the net effect
of NR and sharpening is detail neutral. I
assume the re-sharpening is USM based, but is designed to complement the NR and
may be set by frequency. Occasionally,
with some particular subjects and noise, it is so good, and artifact free, that
I use it to sharpen beyond simple recovery.
Then I use light FM deconvolution, mostly one or two pixel, but occasionally
more. Very occasionally will I mask
different amounts at this stage.
The intent of these steps is to get a nice, clean image with optimal detail
from which to do any further adjustment.
> The latter applied in
> layers the Photokit sharpener would categorize as "creative sharpening"
> with the final variety being "output sharpening."
That isn't clear to me. I've not thought of myself as doing creative sharpening
at full size. I'm not sure I see the
point. Capture sharpening has already revealed as much detail as possible
without obvious artifacts, so there's nothing
to do unless/until working with a down sampled image.
LCE often makes the detail more obvious, the image may seem sharper, but the
effect is different than conventional USM
for sharpening or deconvolution sharpening.
> I suppose the deconvolution of the raw file as in DXO to obviate lens defects
> is
> rather a capture sharpening too.
That's how I would classify it.
> I have never used PKS but it appears there are many discrete
> algorithms that are modulated with layer masks and changing opacity
> modulates the effects.
I almost always adjust post sampling sharpening with layer opacity and often
masks.
> There are special routines to "capture sharpen"
> various categories of 35mm film scans that look interesting.
> Deconvolution with FM seems easily superior to USM for one to several
> pixel radius effects.
That's my experience.
> Seems some low ISO very detailed images seem improved by a later USM 0.2
> pixel radius standard sharpening.
Hmmm, I've not tried that.
> USM in PS with the the "more accurate" box checked does employ deconvolution
> too I have read.
I've read that too, but perhaps only in your posts. ;-) Life is short, and I
wish to spend some of it outside the
digital darkroom, so I won't try everything - if it ain't broke ...
> It is not clear to me at all what is the optimal sharpening workflow
> for various types of images intended for web or print.
I so much wish I knew of a magic bullet that would optimally sharpen
everything. But I've found that I need to eyeball
each one, other than a bunch of close to identical images done at once. What's
perfect for one subject turns out to be
wrong for another.
> If I have an
> image look OK full size on my monitor I can set the overall gallery
> sharpening in Smugmug that does the final "output sharpening" at
> smaller sizes. It isn't usually perfect for some images but is close
> enough most of the time. Not sure what happens on zone-10.
I didn't like what ZX did to images it downsized for display. I've set my
defaults to 1024 horiz and 900 vert. and put
appropriate sized images there, so there is no need for clicking a box for
larger size. As that's the same as for my
photo blog and galleries, I don't get into the mess of preparing multiple sizes
of web ready images.
> Mebbe not as sharp as I thought, Mike
Sure you are! :-)
Well Honed Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|